Vikrant Bahal v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2279 OF 2025 Vikrant Bahal ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

...Respondents

Mr. Advait Shukla a/w Prem Dubey & Bharti Gupta, for the Applicant.

Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP, for the Respondent-State. Mr. Shubham Kahite, for the Intervenor i.e. Complainant.

CORAM:

MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.

DATED:

15 DECEMBER 2025 PC:- 1.

Heard Mr. Shukla, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant, Mr. Karmakar, learned APP, for the Respondent-State of Maharashtra and Mr. Shubham Kahite, learned Counsel appointed to represent the interest of the Respondent No.2-First Informant. 2.

By the present Anticipatory Bail Application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Applicant is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.332 of 2024 registered with the Chikhali Police Station, Pimpri-

Chinchwad, Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3.

The prosecution case is set out in Paragraph No.8 of the Order dated 19th July 2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Criminal Bail Application No.4240 of 2025, which reads as under :- "8.

The case of prosecution is that the complainant Devika Sanjay Ghule intending to run old age house for that purpose she was in search of land, the accused was also used to visit the Ashram situated at Jadhav Wadi, Chikhali, therefore, they become familiar with each other. The accused got knowledge that the complainant is in search of land, therefore, accused assured him to provide best location in proper price. In the Month of November, 2022, the accused met the complainant and showed the xerox documents of one place and told her he would show the place and it will get in less amount, therefore, he asked for token amount of Rs. 15 Lakhs. The accused insisted the complainant for the said amount. The complainant in between December 2022 to December 2023 had paid the said amount on certain stages in the shape of cash and online transaction but thereafter the accused did not shown the land to the complainant. When the complainant demanded the amount given by her, he requested to wait for some time, but he did not pay her and cheated the complainant." 4.

Mr. Shukla, learned Counsel for the Applicant, submits that the dispute, if any, is of civil nature. He submits that the Applicant

is not involved in any crime and there are no criminal antecedents against the Applicant.

5.

On the other hand, Mr. Karmakar, learned APP, submits that the offence is very serious and therefore the Anticipatory Bail Application be rejected.

6.

Mr. Shubham Kahite, learned Counsel appointed to represent the Respondent No.2, submits that the offence is very serious. He submits that the First Informant is conducting an old age house and for that old age house a land was being purchased and for that purpose an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- were paid by the First Informant to the Applicant. He submits that the First Informant is not completing the said transaction and also not refunding the said amount of Rs.15,00,000/- He submits that therefore the First Informant who is a social worker and conducting an old age house has suffered tremendous hardships.

7.

Mr. Shukla, learned Counsel for the Applicant, on instructions of the Applicant, states that the Applicant is ready to

voluntarily pay the said amount of Rs.15,00,000/- and that deposited the entire amount of Rs.15,00,00/- in this Court. 8.

Perusal of the record shows that although, prima facie, the offence is serious, in the facts and circumstances the custodial interrogation is not necessary. The Applicant has voluntarily already deposited the entire amount of Rs.15,00,000/- in the Registry of this Court.

9.

Mr. Shukla, learned Counsel for the Applicant, on instructions of the Applicant, states that the Applicant has no objection if said amount of Rs.15,00,000/- is withdrawn by the First Informant.

10.

A learned Single Judge by Order dated 14th August 2025 has granted interim protection to the Applicant. 11.

Accordingly, the case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail by imposing certain conditions.

12.

In view thereof, the following Order is passed:

O R D E R

(a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant - Vikrant Bahal, in connection with CR No.332 of 2024 registered with the Chikhali Police Station, Pimpri-Chinchwad, Pune, he be released on bail on his furnishing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

(b) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when called by the Investigating Officer till filing of the Charge-sheet and shall cooperate with the investigation.

(c) The Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any change thereto.

(d) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or to any Police personnel.

(e) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witness in any manner.

(f) The Applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

13.

The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly. 14.

The Respondent No.2 - Devika Sanjay Ghule who is First Informant is permitted to withdraw the said amount of Rs.15,00,000/- deposited in this Court.

15.

This Court places on record its appreciation for the assistance rendered by Mr. Shubham Kahite, learned Counsel appointed to represent the interest of the Respondent No.2. 16.

The High Court Legal Services Committee, Mumbai, is requested to pay the professional charges to Mr. Shubham Kahite, learned Counsel, as per rules.

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]